who you said you didn't know was a spy, turned out to be a spy. now we have indications that they were working you, whether you were aware or not, trying to get access to the campaign. that's relevant. you think go to russia. we don't know whether or not the trump campaign asked you to go, knew you were going, concerted action with you in going because you won't say so. it fuels speculation enough such that the doj went and got a warrant to surveil you. >> chris, i could talk for hours going through each of the falsehoods that were just outlined. and, again, you talk about being unwitting or not really understanding what's going on. i understand based on all the false evidence and the false narrative that's been out there. the reason why this is the current public perception, just read that book "shattered," about the losing campaign.
page 395 talks about all the specifics. and that gives a lot of what the major drivers are. >> but there is nothing in there about targeting carter page unfairly. everything i said to you is a fact about who you talked to and how they found up being russian operatives and they say they were trying to work you. that was a basis of a lot of the speculation. we still wind up in the same place, which is people are asking you the same questions and instead of answering the questions you talk about bad motivations on the other side. you say that clinton is coming after you or was coming after you because you are catholic and male. that doesn't make sense to anybody, does it? >> again, if you -- not directly targeting me, but, again, page 395 of "shattered" talks about targeting the new administration. and, again, you add david and others talking about polling numbers this morning and without
question this cloud, which has been out there for many, many months going back to even before the election, has been a major drag on the administration. again, based entirely on lies, chris. >> so if part of your initiative is to be fair to the trump campaign, then answer some of these questions. did you ever work with flynn or know him or communicate with him about russian policpolicy. >> never. i never had the opportunity to meet him. >> did you ever give the president directly advice or guidance about russian policy. >> never directly, no. >> did you ever coordinate your trip to russia with any member of the trump campaign, staff or administration? >> i was not representing the trump campaign. i was there as a private citizen. again, along the lines of what president obama suggested, being
active in politics or in political issues, but i was not representing anyone other than myself and my own private views. >> did you coordinate or communicate the details of your trip or that you were going with any member of the trump campaign or administration? >> i never -- again, none of those details -- they knew i was going, but nothing was -- >> how did they know? >> i don't talk about internal discussions. >> it matters because the cushion is they knew you were going. if they knew you were going, they had an interest in you going. did they coordinate anything you said there which was destructive to american policy? >> absolutely not. and nothing i said was destructive to american policy, chris. >> you read about the russian
reckoning that america has condescending and on the wrong track with where russia is involved. it is critical and attacking of the current state of play. >> i think that's an overstatement, chris. i actually was focussing on mutual respect and how a new approach in foreign policy could have a positive impact on the future of u.s.'s position in the world. this was a very pro-american speech having a better approach. >> the language does not read pro-russian. and you know that, no matter what your intentions might have been. your being an advisor to the president was a major factor in them extending the invitation. are you aware of that? >> you are probably referring to a comment by the media people at the university. >> right. >> again, i have spoken at major russian universities going back
over a decade about my research. there is nothing out of the ordinary. and really the whole media firestorm that has transpired -- >> the person said it for a reason. what i'm saying is do you think it is not true that they thought you were a trump advisor and that was part of the appeal in having you come to that particular university? >> it may have been part of the interest. but i think, you know, it is a -- >> but here's why i'm asking. if you acknowledge that this is what the media person said and it was part of the interest, didn't you have a responsibility to say to them, don't invite me to the university if you're doing it because i'm a trump advisor because i'm not. i was at one meeting. i sent them some e-mails. i don't have any access to the president. i am not a policy advisor. but you didn't say any of those things. >> actually, no, to the contrary. i was very clear on multiple occasions that, again, i am just there as a private citizen and this is not a major driver as to
the reason why i am there or i'm just talking about my research and things i have done over a long time. and i think in general last year there was an interest in u.s. perspectives in general and whether any affiliations i may have had on the side just as an informal unpaid advisor, which i made very clear to them throughout was not a factor. and again it is a big distraction from the real crimes and the real influence on the election, which was the civil rights viatiolations and a lot the exact approaches with the propaganda, which went into this. and not only feeding false information to the private media, media institutions like cnn, but even government propaganda networks in the u.s.,
which recited information from the dodgedy dossier in going from september to november. this is $100 million taxpayer funded initiative. >> but remember there are sources within our intelligence agencies that are looking at the information in the dossier and found some of it to be credible and reliable. at the end of the day, a leak is only as good as the truth that comes out of it. carter page, appreciate your side of the story. >> thanks, chris. >> all right, chris. joining us now is peter king of new york. he is a member of the house intelligence and homeland security committees. good morning, congressman. >> good morning. how are you? >> i know you were listening intently to the interview there with carter page. what did you hear that was new? >> a lot of it is new because he seems to be in different directions. i like to say up front, i am not aware of any evidence so far of
any collusion between the trump campaign and any russian agency and carter page, my understanding is that donald trump has never even spoken to him, never had a conversation with him. so again, whatever he's saying, he's saying on his own. as far as i know he had no connection at all to the trump campaign. >> do you believe some of the things he just said. he said every word of the dossier is a joke and he said he never met any of the people in there. he never said a word to any of them. so you take thhim at his word? >> i have no way of knowing. since he was not a part of the campaign, since he has no connections to donald trump, unless somebody can show there is a connection between what he was doing in the trump campaign, to me it's almost irrelevant as far as the investigation is concerned, you know, what carter page was doing because, again, i have not seen any link between the campaign and russia and carter page, again, he was talking about a lot of things
today i have no way of knowing whether they're true or not and none of it ties the campaign, the trump campaign into any russian intelligence, russian government or the campaign. >> so carter page is not someone who you, on the house intelligence committee, would be interested in interviewing. >> oh, no. his name is there, obviously and since his name has come up i would think carter page would have to be a witness before the committee, absolutely, to see if there is anything more there. but i'm saying based on what he was saying to chris and he seemed to be going in different directions, i don't see into how any of it ties into donald trump. but, listen, his name is there ands a chris pointed out it's leeked out there was a warrant. obviously carter page will be questioned by the staff members, both the democrats and the republicans and i assume he'll come before the committee. i have no problem with that. >> why haven't you interviewed
him yet? >> first of all, the investigation is going behind the scenes right now for obvious reasons and this is going to be a very slow, steady but very important investigation. to me, usually a person like carter page who's name is prominent, they're usually the last one you interview. you get all the information before that, get all the details that you can, talk to any other possible witnesses before you go to the people whose names have been prominently mentioned. >> that makes sense because here is what he know is on your agenda next week. you are interviewing james comey, national security agency director mike rogers, former acting attorney general sally yates, james clapper. what are you hoping to get out of this? what is the burning question for you? >> well, to me, first of all, in a public hearing we're not going
to get very much out because anything that is pertinent would be classified and would have to be given in a private session. we have already had meetings with sally yates. we meet with comey, rogers, clapper a number of times in executive sessions, private sessions. so i don't know really what more we could get out of it at this stage. what i would be asking general clapper is that as far as he knew as director of national intelligence, there is no evidence of any collusion between the trump campaign and russia. as far as john brendan -- again, i have to watch what i say because we have had a number of executive session hearings behind closed doors. i have not seen any evidence yet that leads the trump campaign to russia. >> even not with general michael flynn. >> not as far as any collusion, no. >> you know that he was speaking to the russians, but you're saying that was not to the
benefit of the trump campaign? >> no. there is no evidence i have seen yet. now, there may be something there, but i have not seen it. there was no secret that general flynn has been in russia. there were pictures of him with putin and the fact that he was talking to russia, i mean, can also show links between the clinton campaign and russia. almost all of us on capitol hill at some time another met the russian ambassador. the question is was there any evidence of collusion. so far i haven't seen it. but i have an open mind. if something comes up, i will be the first to talk about it. right now i have not seen any evidence at all showing any type of collusion. >> okay. quickly, another hot spot obviously. north korea, you know about the meeting over at the white house. >> right. >> have you learned anything now on what's happening or what the plan is for north korea? >> actually, the house had the meeting last night in the capital. it was a similar meeting to what
was at the white house. not really. but again i'm on the intel committee, so we have been getting information about north korea prior to this, beyond what was told at the briefing yesterday. this is a serious situation, very serious. it is important that the administration bring in members of the house and the senate to allow them to ask questions. as far as anything new, no. >> can i get your reaction to the tax plan that the white house has put out? it would be a tax cut, obviously, for corporations and for some of the highest income earners. but what analysts have said and economists would said is it would hurt blue states. it would hurt new york because you would no longer be able to deduct state and local taxes, which are quite high in new york. are you on board with that tax
cut. >> i am not on board with that aspect of it, no. i would have to oppose anything that takes away property tax. my direct in particular, almost the main asset that most people have is their home. these are modest homes, but their property tax is very high. the state income tax is very high. so to them it would be a net loss. having said that, i should point the overall tax cuts is important. i do believe in growth exhibition, but as far as the particulars of the deductions involving property taxes, i would have to strongly oppose that. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> all right. you just heard the gop take on the russian investigation. now we're going to talk with the top democrat on that same house intel committee. does he agree with the reckoning of congressman peter king? we'll see. it's taking the best technologies out there and adapting them to work for you. the ultrasound that can see inside patients,
can also detect early signs of corrosion at our refineries. high-tech military cameras that see through walls, can inspect our pipelines to prevent leaks. remote-controlled aircraft, can help us identify potential problems and stop them in their tracks. at bp, safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better.
russian interference in the election has a lot of different tent calls to it and one of the main ones was there proof of collusion between russian operative and the trump campaign and now administration. we just heard the republican congressman peter king say he has seen no proof of it to this point. he's on the house intel committee. they just put out their witness list. our guest on the show, carter page, a man at the center of that investigation is on that list. let's get more perspective.
congressman adam schiff of california. congressman, always good to see you. >> thanks, chris. >> no proof peter king says. i have seen no proof of collusion between the trump campaign and russia. carter page says the allegations are laughable. what do you say? >> carter page is a person of interest to the community and probably likely to come before the committee, so i don't want to comment on anything he's had to say in particular. but i do think we need to get to the bottom of these allegations of collusion or coordination. i have to disagree with my college in terms of if there is any evidence of collusion. i believe there is. but this is something we need to investigate. i think there was a reason why the fbi began its investigation and why it continues that investigation. i don't think it is something the fbi does without any basis. but that's about as much as i can say without going into particulars. i will say this, i think it would be deeply irresponsible of
us not to follow the facts where they led, to do it objectively and not predetermine a conclusion. but from many of the public reports, there is ample reason to do this investigation. >> concern politically if there winds up being no real proof that is actionable on a prosecution basis about the campaign or the administration and russian operatives that will be seen as a failure? >> it shouldn't be seen as a failure if we do our jobs and follow the facts where they lead and reach a unified conclusion. we shouldn't go into with with the object we want to score this political point or that political point or we want to come up ultimately with a certain conclusion. we'll be doing our job if we thoroughly investigate this and reach a sound determination of what happened, what the russians did, the different levers the russians pulled. we know the russians used a variety of techniques to
interfere with elections in europe. they used some here. and we want to find out everything the russians did. i would say also, though, i think what would give the public the greatest confidence is if we had a truly independent commission that was well resourced and could be completely repromoved from my political consideration. >> you raise an interesting issue, which is about how will the people find satisfaction? there is argument to be made you shouldn't be dealing with the collusion issue. that is a potentially criminal matter. you should be dealing with russian interference, what happened to the political system, how we combat it and do better in the next election. what do you make of that suggestion? >> i think long has a responsibility to find out what the russians did. they have used blackmail. they have used compromising material. they have used financial even
tanglement, hacking, dumping, paved media trolls. but, yes, we're not the prosecutors. ultimately the information we get we may refer to the justice department. of course, they are doing their own investigation. but i don't think that means we artificially wall off part of our oversight and say we're not going to look at these strategies the russians may have used. i think we need to look at it all. >> one last thing and then i want to ask you about taxes. can you say with confidence at this point it is premature for people to say there is going to be no proof of collusion? >> yes. it's certainly premature. one of the challenges we have, chris, in the investigation is there are members of the gang of eight in the economy tee that have received certain information and the rest of the committee members. what i have been urging the fbi is share the information that the gang of eight has received
so we're all on the same page. but that is an issue yet to be resolved. >> the tax wish list is already going to be a smack in the face to districts and constituencies like your own in california because other than growth as a result of tax cuts, the way to pay for this wish list is to stop the deductibility of state and local taxes. that's going to go hard for the big states with the big tax burden like yours. what is your take on the possibility of that passing? >> i think a lot of states like new york and california that have invested a lot in public services stand to lose a great deal with this particular tax plan. and really it's a blow from two directions. on the one hand if republicans repeal the affordable care act and essentially do away with a lot of the medicaid support, people's access to health care who are poor or working class families and at the same time
they do away with the state's ability to back fill and provide those services, it is going to be crushing to the states. and the new interration of the republican health care bill makes that problem worse because it says these guaranteed provisions in terms of your health care plan will go away or be at the whim of states and now we're saying and the states aren't going to have the money to do it. so you put the two together, it is taking people's health care away from them to give people who are doing quite well already a massive tax cut. i think that's bad for all the states, not just the big states. >> do you believe that this waiver and promise of more choice is a bait and switch? >> oh, that's absolutely the case. what they're going to give the states is the opportunity to deny people if they have pre-existing conditions and deny them other forms of coverage. but this is the way they try to
put a band-aidtm over it and try to say we're not doing away with people's ability to get health care if they have pre-existing conditions. we're just going to price it above their ability to pay. and the way we are going to bring down premiums is take people who need health care and say you are out of luck, but for everybody who is healthy, your premiums will go down. that's not a prescription for a healthy nation. but i think that's the bill of goods they're trying to sell. >> congressman, thank you for being on "new day" and good luck in your quest for clarity. >> the president's wish list on taxes making big promises but thin on details, so we will get the bottom line on what it means next.
they want to keep money here, rather than going off here. individual tax brackets instead of seven. doubles the standard deduction for children and ends the estate tax, amt and most tax breaks. what do you think? >> i think the lack of detail is pretty revealing in itself. i think it gives us an idea of where this is going. there are a lot of specific tax cuts in what the president cut out. there is little information about how we offset that. they're moving away from the idea of permanent revenue neutral tax reform, toward the idea of a temporary tax cut that would expire at the end of ten yars because that's the only way they could get it through the reconciliation process. i think a lack of information is repe revealing. the principal they come up with is eliminating the deductibility of state and local taxes, which
hits blue states hardest. two-thirds of those were paid for by states that hillary clinton won. the question is if you can get republican from those states to vote for it. >> it depends on the sensitivity of your constituency. we should be careful not to discount the police cal to t-- l potency of this. >> i think this says to me, as other evidence, it is going to be almost impossible for them to find offsets to make a truly revenue neutral tax cut that would offset all of the reductions they want to push through. that means you go back to page 1 of what republican control of government usually means, a tax cut, even if it has to be temporary to get within the reconciliati reconciliati reconciliation.
>> deficit be damned? >> i remember that. i remember when allen greenspan in 2001 said the big risk after bill clinton left office is we were paying down the national debt was too fast and then we did the bush tax cut. ronald reagan cut taxes, got 14 million jobs. bill clinton raised taxes, got 28 million jobs. president obama raised taxes, had almost ten times as many private sector jobs as george w. bush did. it is hard to pinpoint taxes as the key variable in the rates of economic growth, job growth and income growth. >> but nobody cares about the deficit. we always talk about it, but it is always there. >> the one way which tax cuts
become a negative is if they become linked to cuts in government. medicare is the one. >> look, it is also another a coincidence the timing. here we are on the banner of 100 days. the president has said it is a meaningless standard, but he's coming out with a lot of things to try and impress. everybody has got a take on what the 100 days means for trump, including ""the simpsons."" here's a sample. >> i am not replacing him. >> don't wrinkle the suit. >> 100 days in office, so many accomplishments, my twitter following increased by 700 and finally we consumed hibernating bears. >> sir, here is a new bill you must read immediately. it lowers taxes only for republicans. >> can't fox news read it and
i'll read what they have to say? >> no, you have to read it. >> a new supreme court justice takes her seat on the bench. >> you said you'd replace me with garland. >> we missed the part where marge reaches into her hair to grab her pills. >> lyndon johnson said if i've lost walter cronkite, i've lot mid-america. do you think donald trump is saying if i'm lost "the simpsons," i've lost america? >> ron, thank you. great to have you here. >> our next guest on new day is a combat veteran, a road scholar and an author. the nonprofit organization robin
hood foundation naming its new ceo. we will talk with mr. moore about his plans to fight pove y poverty. >> a cargoes up in flames. we have this incredible rescue to show you ahead. >> that's our good stuff. aking . hey, hey, hey! you're not taking those. whoa, whoa! you're not taking that. come with me. you're not taking that. you're not taking that. you're not taking that. mom, i'm taking the subaru. don't be late. even when we're not there to keep them safe, our subaru outback will be. (vo) love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru.
the robin hood foundation known in new york as the largest poverty fighting organization has a simple mission, to improve the living standards for millions of low-income folks. how do they do it? let's talk to the man at the center. the organization's new leader, war veteran, road scholar, youth advocate. wes moore joins us now. congratulations. >> thank you so much. >> underachiever. >> the gala is well known and the money that comes in is tremendous and i have always seen it as a reflection of the need. what is the need right now in terms of what robin hood is trying to address? >> well, i think that the need is that there are in new york alone 1.8 million new yorkers that are currently living in poverty. and we're talking concentrated
generational concrete poverty. and then millions of other new yorkers that are right on that cusp. the goal and what we want to be able to do is make sure they are not forgotten in this bigger, broader conversation that when we're having these conversations about what type of society are we going to create, that those people who oftentimes have been left out of those conversations know they are included and not alone. >> what is the answer to fighting poverty? do you just give people money and food stamps and make sure they are not falling through the cracks? or do you try to have all sorts of training programs and other things? >> i think the answer is all the above, right? i think the challenge is that poverty is a wholistic problem. so you can't talk about education without also talking about transportation and help and all the other things that contribute to this larger problem. we have to come up with wholistic solutions to a wholistic problem. but the other thing is this, we understand that robin hood and
my commitment in terms of working with partners is the idea that philanthropy alone will not fix what policies have created, that there are policies that have to be talked about. >> why did you want to do this? you could do anything that you want to do. why do you believe that this is an important place to be, especially right now? >> i think that robin hood both in new york and on a national scale is an important place and has a voice in this fight. robin hood is almost 30 years old and has put over $2.5 billion into this fight of poefty. the average donation is 1 $3. so we have an army of people who are involved and donates and supporting. but it is at a unique time, particularly right now because it has never been easy being poor in this country. it is increasingly difficult being poor in this country. >> why is that? >> we're watching basic fabrics being pulled.
we're watching single parents. we're watching people who are returning from prison. we're watching kids who are attending schools that are as disinterested in tell as they are in the school. we're watching so many things that we hold on to that are true as a core american values that are now being questioned. that's what we have to come back with. >> what do you see in the political climate right now? what concerns you? >> well, first, the tone. the tone and the fact that there seems to be this continued retreat to corners and bounda boundaries and we're finding fewer and fewer people to understand that the solutions and the rhetoric are forgetting about people who are left on the outside. i think the other thing that is really concerning to me is how we're thinking about budgets. if anyone shows me what you're spending your money on every month, you also show me what you care about.
well, government is no different. you show me what you spend money on. you show me what you cut. you are also showing me who and what it is you care about. i spent much of my childhood in both the bronx and baltimore. two communities that have been neglected and we've known it. we've lived in communities that we know we're not at the front of the conversation. that not just has a structural impact on us but a psychological impact on us and that's the thing that's most dangerous to me, that we are finding increasing parts of our population that feel completely disengaged. >> are you running for office at some point. >> i'm running the robin hood foundation, and that's what i'm excited about. robin hood has a unique conversation and a unique role to play in this fight because it could serve as a distributor of funds, but also as an amazing
importer and exporter of good ideas, right? if it's working in new york, let's bring it elsewhere. and if it's working elsewhere, let's bring it to new york. >> good luck with it. >> bless you. thank you so much. >> thanks so much for sharing it with us. >> you're welcome here to discuss these issues. >> up next anthony boar dane to talk about the new season of "parts unknown." where is he headed? looks like someplace cold. that's up next. and the surrounding wetlands, too. because safety is never being satisfied. place cold. that's up next. and always working to be better.
anthony bourdain "parts unknown" kicks off its ninth season on sunday and begins in los angeles and the people overlooked. >> one in ten people in los angeles are undocumented, one in ten. think about that number for a while. that's who's here now. contemplate, if you will, what would happen if anywhere near 10% of the workforce were no longer here. joining us now is the man with the coolest job in the world, anthony bourdain. >> thank you. >> that's a staggering number. >> we have done an l.a. show before where we stayed within the korean community. this time we pretended no one
other than mention coxicans liv. we wanted to ask the question how mexican is l.a. and how mexican are you, mexican identity and then address the really serious question that popped up as we were shooting. morsy is really big in the community. >> get out of here. are you kidding? >> it cracked the code for us trying to -- the question of particularly chicano identity. >> the musician from the smiths is huge in the chicano? >> they respond really powerfully to these songs of displacement and do you -- where is home? >> oh, my gosh. that's pretty fascinating. given that you talk to people who are, you know, undocumented,
were people reluctant to talk to you on camera. >> we were careful about who we were talking to. it was really not as much about documented or undocumented labor as it is look how absolutely vital, essential and, you know, part of our cellular tissue mexicans, mexican culture, mexican music, particularly in california. >> is there interesting food we don't know about happening in l.a.? >> every year the l.a. food gets better and better. but i think what mexican chefs are doing now is some of the most exciting stuff worldwide. >> give us a little taes. >> mexican chefs at high end restaurants in mexico and california who, instead of going to france to study, studies with other emerging modern mexican chefs and were giving the kind of respect to deeply complex
mexican sauce and ingreedients they have always deserved. >> give us where you are going for the rest of the season? >> among others, oman, which i think people will be fascinated by, a little explored and tremendously interesting and beautiful country. >> what do you find there? >> mountains, beaches. empty corner of the desert. and really unusually or particularly tolerant form of islam that's nearly nonsectarian and really the next big tourist destination should be oman. >> that's fascinating. you went to one of my favorite places in the world, portugal. >> it is great. >> so special. and sort of off the beaten path, you know. a lot of people go to madrid or barcelona, but not everybody goes to part gortugal. >> we went to porto.
and then anartica. >> the people that choose to go down there and live in total darkness for six months or constant sun year after year after year, to support a relatively small group of elite scientists who are collecting data and information in the pursuit of pure science and knowledge, something in sort of out of fashion these days. >> really. and what do they eat? >> it's essentially like a mining camp or a college, you know, cafeteria. it's not -- there's not a single green leaf or growing thing. people talk about fresh vegetables down there like with this frighteningly lustful look on their places. they call them freshies. do you have any freshies, but
amazing people. really, extraordinary and unusual group of people from all walks of life who go down there to support these scientists and work really, really hard. >> oh, my gosh. it sounds great. thanks so much for previewing it for us. can't wait to see all of that. and you can join us this sunday night at 9:00 p.m. only on cnn. the good stuff is next.
wrinkles? your time is up! new neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair with the proven power of retinol. reduces wrinkles in just one week. neutrogena® but they're different.d kind it's nice to remove artificial ingredients. kind never had to. we've used real ingredients, whole nuts, and natural flavors from the very beginning. give kind a try.
brought to you by kind snacks, ingredients you can see and pronounce. give kind a try. >> all right. let's get some good stuff going here. dramatic dash cam video of a car on fire. how is that the good stuff? because of the rescue. you got two men trapped in there. look closely. another one on the driver's side. that's a concerned citizen, dragging out the driver. listen to this. >> he kept saying the passenger's name to see if he was all right. but, yeah, that was it. the other one was unconscious. >> that means nathan yell hopped back into action. he helped the officer get that passenger out. both men survived. we tell you these stories to know that you have fellow americans out there who are willing to put their lives on
the line for each other. >> they are built of a different stock than the average person. >> meanwhile, president trump issuing a series of executive orders and now there is a way to give them your own personal touch. >> reporter: president trump rarely seems happier than when he's signing executive orders. >> anybody want to watch me sign? >> reporter: and he's getting lots of practice. >> i'm very proud of this one. okay. >> reporter: he'll have signed more executive orders in his first 100 days than any president since world war ii. >> doesn't get much bigger than that. >> reporter: though he used to bash president obama for doing it. >> all these executive orders, it is a basic disaster. you can't do it. >> reporter: oh, yes, he can. but holding up an executive order can leave the president holding the bag. at the twitter account trump
draws, the president draws like a kid and spells like one, too. often the drawings relate to the news. for instance, when the president informed china's leader over dessert that u.s. missiles have been launched over syria, that resulted in this. new york magazine says an l.a. visual effects artist who wants to remain anonymous told the magazine the twitter account sold itself. he saw the leader of the free world holding up paper. for instance, you could decree, grab them by the you know what jokes should be banned. or hissing at ivanka trump should be punishable by flogging. so the next time the president holds up one of those executive
orders, that order could keep on trucking who knows where. cnn new york. >> i live trucks. everybody agrees with that. >> i'm glad people are channelling their creativity in such ways. >> time for news room with poppy harlow and john berman. good morning, my friends. >> good morning, you two. have a great day. let's get started. >> all right. good morning, everyone. i'm john berman. >> i'm popty harlow. so what do you do if your administration has been criticized for failing to get one big win in 100 days. how about trying to accomplish 100 big days in one day or at least look like it? that seems to be the goal inside of the white house this morning. the president announcing he won't withdraw from nafta, at least for now and will